Wash. Rev. Code » Title 6 · Chapter 6.27
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 6.27.080 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) A writ of garnishment directed to a bank, savings and loan association, or credit union that maintains branch offices shall identify either a particular branch of the financial institution or the financial institution as the garnishee defendant. The head office of a financial institution shall be considered a separate branch for purposes of this section. The statement required by subsection (2) of this section may be incorporated in the writ or served separately.
(2) Service shall be as required by RCW 6.27.110 (1) and (3) and shall be by certified mail, return receipt requested, directed to or by personal service, in the same manner as a summons in a civil action is served, on the manager, cashier, or assistant cashier of the financial institution, except that, if the financial institution, and not a branch, is named as garnishee defendant, service shall be either on the head office or on the place designated by the financial institution for receipt of service of process. There shall be served with the writ, as part of the service, a statement in writing signed by the plaintiff or plaintiff's attorney, stating (a) the defendant's place of residence and business, occupation, trade, or profession, or (b) the defendant's federal tax identification number, or (c) the defendant's account number, if such information is not incorporated in the writ. If the statement is not served with the writ and such information is not included in the writ, the service shall be deemed incomplete and the garnishee shall not be held liable for funds owing to the defendant or property of the defendant in the possession of or under the control of the garnishee defendant that it fails to discover.
(3) A writ naming the financial institution as the garnishee defendant shall be effective only to attach deposits of the defendant in the financial institution and compensation payable for personal services due the defendant from the financial institution. A writ naming a branch as garnishee defendant shall be effective only to attach the deposits, accounts, credits, or other personal property of the defendant (excluding compensation payable for personal services) in the possession or control of the particular branch to which the writ is directed and on which service is made.
A writ of garnishment is effective against property in the possession or control of a financial institution only if the writ of garnishment is directed to and names a branch as garnishee defendant.
[ 1988 c 231 s 23; 1987 c 442 s 1008.]

Notes:

Severability—1988 c 231: See note following RCW 6.01.050.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2021–2026 · leading case: Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022). · cites it 4× “12 13 Plaintiff next argues that per RCW 6.27.080, if the writ names the financial institution, 14 garnishment is open to wherever the funds are located throughout the United States.”
Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022). · cites it 3× “2d 683 (1977), and that the Washington Statute for Writs Directed to a 24 25 Financial Institution, RCW 6.27.080, was not followed here. Id. 26 In Response, Plaintiff argues: 27 Mr.”
P.s.c., Inc., V. Purdys Pub. House, Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “(2) Except as provided in RCW 6.27.080 for service on a bank, savings and loan association, or credit union, the writ of garnishment shall be mailed to the garnishee by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed in the same manner as a summons in a civil action, and…”
Alina Farooq v. Azeem Khan (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “RCW 6.27.080(3) (writs against financial institutions); Hinote’s Home Furnishings, Inc.”
Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022). “Plaintiff responds to 16 those arguments with his own reading of the applicable statute, RCW 6.27.080. Dkt. #12 at 9– 17 10. It currently appears to the Court that this garnishment was valid under Washington law.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 6.27.080(3) — 3 cases
Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022). “12 13 Plaintiff next argues that per RCW 6.27.080, if the writ names the financial institution, 14 garnishment is open to wherever the funds are located throughout the United States.”
Alina Farooq v. Azeem Khan (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “RCW 6.27.080(3) (writs against financial institutions); Hinote’s Home Furnishings, Inc.”
Kriegman v. Ponton (W.D. Wash. 2022). “2d 683 (1977), and that the Washington Statute for Writs Directed to a 24 25 Financial Institution, RCW 6.27.080, was not followed here. Id. 26 In Response, Plaintiff argues: 27 Mr.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.